Coin of Henry the VIII

I was the “Lord Ahmed's unwelcome guest”,
according to Stephen Pollard (April 07, 2005). I was not unduly
impressed by the appellation of ‘a notorious antisemite’ for
this term has been thoroughly debased like Henry the VIII’s
coin. The Jewish Week (April, 1 2005) condemned the Good
Samaritan parable as ‘an antisemitic slur’; the Webster
dictionary describes ‘antisemitism’ as ‘adverse attitude to
Israel’s policies’; while Bar-Ilan University's Rabbi Dr. Pinchas
Hayman told his listeners that "as long as Christians keep Jesus
as God, they will be antisemitic”. Mr Pollard’s worldview was
made clear by his reference to Ken Livingstone’s affair. If a
person who considers a Jewish hack being above reproach because
of his Jewishness were to fail to consider me ‘an antisemite’ I
would be worried for I am adverse to Israel’s policies, venerate
Jesus Christ and admire the Good Samaritan. Moreover, I stand
for full equality of Jew and non-Jew, in Palestine and
elsewhere, and this is clearly an ‘antisemitic’ position for
Pollard and his kin.

I was even less impressed by Pollard’s
reference to my assumed Swedish name. Next time he may call
Salman Rushdie “actually a Mr Wiggins, a resident of Bienfait,
Saskatchewan”. Writers’ lot is not always an easy sailing. I
walk under a fatwa not less scaring than that of Rushdie, for my
name is on the hit list of Jewish Defense League, and I do not
intend to be as accommodating to them as Mr Pollard perhaps
would like. (This comparison goes a long way, for I am not less
critical to Judaism than Mr Rushdie to Islam; but Jewish
assassins are more successful than their Muslim competitors, and
the British readers may remember Lord Moyne and many others.)
Israeli newspapers are quite critical of me, but they never
published such rubbish (“actually, a Swede…”) for I am quite
well known locally.

Pollard’s attempts to establish my guilt by
association are equally futile. I wrote not only for “Zavtra,
Russia’s most anti-Semitic publication” (on a par with Ken
Livingstone and Prince Harry, I presume), but also for
Haaretz, the leading Israeli newspaper that published an
advertisement calling for ‘vengeance to the evil nation’ of
Palestinians; but somehow nobody mentions this moral fault of
mine.

But I was thoroughly annoyed by Pollard’s
references to Lord Ahmed of Rotherham. Pollard presents
elevation of Lord Ahmed, ‘the first Muslim peer’ as an action
connected to his faith, not to his personal achievement; he
implies that Ahmed is under an obligation ‘to behave’. This is
quite shocking racist remark. There were and are dozens of
Jewish peers, though Jewish community of Britain is many times
smaller than the Jewish one. None of the Jewish peers considers
himself admitted ‘on condition’, and there is no reason to
impose such a condition on a Muslim peer. That is, unless you
have two different measures, one for Jews, another for ordinary
mortals, as Mr Pollard apparently has.

The full text of my talk, The Jews and
Empire, can be read on my site
www.israelshamir.net and it will be soon published in a
book. And by the way, none of many Jews present at the talk
considered it as 'antisemitic'.

Pollard says that your views and background
should be apparent from doing a Google search on you.

Well, I did a single page Google search on
him, finding out that :

1) He is associated with the Adam Smith
Institute - one of those bizarre think tanks that issues
research papers complaining that 'Lady' Thatcher didn't
dismantle enough of Britain's industry.

2) A sensible fellow at Oxford thinks that
'Stephen Pollard is an ignorant git'.

3) One of Pollard's own articles begins : 'I
am a warmonger. I am bloodthirsty. I am rabid.'

Enough said!

The Times has gone downhill a lot under
Murdoch, becoming the paper for people who are too ignorant to
read the Sun...

Ian

From Kristoffer Larsson, Sweden

Dear Editor,

I noted that You too have adopted the myth
that Israel Shamir is in fact a Swedish anti-Semite named Jöran
Jermas. As a Swede, I happen to know a little about the
organization behind this "revelation". I'm talking about Expo,
who has existed since 1995 with the outspoken purpose of
fighting racism in any form. However, their devotion to Zionism
has remained unknown to many.

In their magazine they used to send a "Thanks
to" different organizations, with which they cooperate. Among
those organizations Expo was so eager to openly promote, we find
the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). That ADL has a habit of always
defending Israeli war crimes is in no way differential to other
of Expo's friend (for instance, they openly cooperate with the
German anarchy-communist AntiFa, who every year arrange
demonstration in memory of the bombing of Dresden - not to
condemn the bombing of civilians, but to support it! "Bomber
Harris, do it again!" they yell with Israeli flags in their
hands. However, Expo also cooperates with British Searchlight,
led by the Zionist Gerry Gable).

But openly having ties with the Israeli spy
organisation ADL must of course be taken serious. According to
Jeff Blankfort, who was exposed to ADL's spying, they still
continue with paying of spies (read more on www.adlwatch.org)

When referring to ADL in a footnote in an
article on Shamir, Expo wrote that "Anti-Defamation League, ADL,
is an American Jewish organization that monitors and watch over
right extremism and anti-Semitism."

As far as I know Expo has never denounced
ADL.

I'd also like to mention in particular of the
people at Expo. I'm speaking about Fredrik Malm, chairperson of
Liberal Youth and an enthusiastic defendant of Israel's
apartheid. And as a matter of fact, he's a personal friend of
Zvi Mazel, the fascist who destroyed Dror Feiler's art work at a
museum here in Stockholm.

I hope this will help You understand why Expo
spends time making up stories about anti-Semitism. Expo exists
in the interest of Israel.

Best regards,

Kristoffer Larsson

Stockholm, Sweden

kristoffer.larsson@sobernet.nu

From Richard
Wilcox, Tokyo

To The Times of London,

The recent hack job done on the Lord Ahmed/Israel Shamir affair
regarding Shamir's book Flowers of Galilee was unfair,
hypocritical,
and arrogant. Shamir's critique of the culture of Jewish
supremicism is
extraordinarily nuanced and knowledgeable. Smearing him as a
Swedish
Anti Semite is false and merely a cowardly way to avoid
discussing the
substance of the issues Mr. Shamir so courageously raises. I
call for
the Times to issue an apology to Shamir and to publish a more
objective
review of the fine work, Flowers of Galilee.

I was present at Israel Shamir’s book launch at the House of
Lords. Not only
that Lord Ahmed wasn’t mistaken in inviting Shamir, he
should rather be
praised for hosting a politically balanced and ideologically
enlightening
event. And yet the man who should be shamed is in fact
Stephan Pollard who
fails in dismissing the long history of the extensive
collaboration between
Zionist leaders and the British Empire. It is Pollard who
managed somehow to
forget Balfour declaration and Weitzman role behind it. Does
Suez War (1956)
ring a bell?

If this isn’t enough, Pollard proved to be pretty ignorant
when Jewish
religious issues are concerned. Somehow he has managed to
forget the clear
Jewish pray demanding 'God’s vengeance upon goyim'. As it
seems, the Jewish
religion, like many other religions, has its dark corners.
And yet, to
insist that Shamir or anyone else should remain quiet about
it is a clear
act against intellectual scholarship.

Being myself an Ex Israeli, I would argue that Shamir’s
exposure of some
unacceptable Jewish religious perceptions is enormously
important. I would
argue as well that Jewish people would be the first to
benefit from
listening and reading Shamir. To conclude, Lord Ahmed
willingness to invite
such a brave man is in itself a courageous act and a
necessary step towards
a deeper realisation of the current cultural and political
crisis.

Fiction as Journalism

Comments by Rixon Stewart - April 7, 2005

In the wake of a meeting he addressed at Britain’s House of
Lords, yesterday's Times launched a libellous attack on writer
Israel Shamir. Penned by Stephen Pollard, it was fraught with
untruths and is reprinted in part, below, along with this
website’s comments in italic.

“A term has returned to the lexicon of political debate in
recent months; a term for which, in a decent world, we should
have no need. That term is “anti-Semitism”…

On February 23, Lord Ahmed hosted a book launch in the House of
Lords for a man going by the name of Israel Shamir. “Israel
Shamir” is, in fact, a Swedish-domiciled anti-Semite also known
as Joran Jermas.”

Here Pollard begins his work of character assassination using
half-truths, careful omissions and downright lies. For example,
far from living in Sweden, Israel Shamir usually resides in the
Israeli town of Jaffa, as even the most cursory research would
have revealed. As would the fact that Shamir is also descended
from a long line of prominent Rabbis and Jewish intellectuals.

However Pollard does not mention any of this, nor does he
mention that Shamir is a former Israeli paratrooper who fought
in the 1973 Yom Kippur War under the command of Ariel Sharon.
Instead Pollard implies that Shamir, “also known as Jцran Jermas”,
is an impostor and a “rabid anti-Semite”.

Pollard continues:

“The gist of Shamir/Jermas’s speech at the meeting (which
Pollard did not attend but which this writer did) can be
gleaned from its title, “Jews and the Empire”. It included
observations such as: “All the [political] parties are
Zionist-infiltrated.” “Your newspapers belong to Zionists . . .”

As indeed does the Times, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch, a
known Zionist who is said to exert
dictatorial control over his editors. Which is maybe why the
Times published Pollard’s libellous article in the first place.

He continues:

“Why would Lord Ahmed have hosted such a man in the Lords? It
is, of course, possible that Lord Ahmed had no idea that Shamir/Jermas
was a rabid anti-Semite. Yet it takes only a quick Google to
discover his views and background. He has worked for Zavtra,
Russia’s most anti-Semitic publication, and is allied with the
Vanguard News Network, set up by an American, Alex Linder — a
man so extreme that he was even ostracised by the US neo-Nazi
National Alliance.”

Here Pollard is very selective in his use of the Internet and
in using Shamir’s employment record; making no mention of the
fact that Shamir also worked for Israeli national radio, the BBC
and the Israeli daily newspaper Haaretz. Pollard omits this,
even though it is clear from a brief visit to his website,
because mentioning it would undermine the fiction he is trying
to create of “Shamir/Jermas” being neo-Nazi resident of Sweden.

Pollard continues:

“If, however, Lord Ahmed does feel that he made a mistake in
inviting him, he has yet to demonstrate it. Shamir/Jermas’s
speech was made nearly two months ago. On learning of its
contents, I wrote to Lord Ahmed, asking him two questions. Did
he consider the invitation to have been a mistake? Did he
condemn the remarks? He did not reply.

Yesterday, I phoned him. When I told him that I planned to write
a piece drawing attention to his actions in hosting Shamir/Jermas
and that I wanted to give him every opportunity to respond, he
replied: “I am not even going to speak with you.” He then put
the phone down”.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,173-1557932,00.html

And who can blame him? For Pollard displays all the traits
that have caused journalists to be likened to
“intellectual prostitutes”, ready to do the bidding of rich
newspaper owners without any regard for the truth. Here he
reports on a book presentation he did not attend, to a
mixed crowd of Muslims, Jews and Christians all searching for
peace in the Middle East. A book written by a man Pollard
describes as a “rabid anti-Semite”, without mentioning his true
origins or the fact that a former speaker from the Israeli
Knesset also addressed the same book presentation. Nor does
Pollard mention that Shamir also worked in the Knesset himeself
as the spokesman for the Israel Socialist Party.

None of this is mentioned by Pollard because it would undermine
the fiction he is trying spin: a story about “anti-Semitism”
which masquerades as journalism. Like a growing number of Jews,
Shamir is speaking out against the injustice perpetrated by
Zionism, a political body that has effectively hijacked Judaism
for its own purposes. Which is why Pollard never once refers to
Shamir's origins or background. To do so would completely
undercut his arguement and expose him for the liar he is.

From Lynda Mortl to the Times

The Editor:

When is it going to end? This obsession
with anti-Semitism. Again today we have Stephen Pollard
telling us that Lord Ahmed must apologize for hosting an
evening at the House of Lords to launch Israel Shamir's book
(Lord Ahmed's unwelcome guest). Lord Ahmed has nothing to
apologize for.

I was at that book launch and I heard
nothing that I would call anti-Semitic although Lord Ahmed
felt he had to make a point that he did not agree with
everything Mr. Shamir says. I have since read the book,
Flowers of Galilee. It is a courageous, timely and vitally
important book written by a man whose greatest desire is to
see peace between Palestinians and Jews. To rebuild a
country where the two peoples can live side by side in
harmony. And he knows that unless some unpleasant facts are
addressed this can never happen. For too long Israel has
been getting away with murder. It is a time for honesty.

The solution to the problem is with the
US. With this powerful sponsor uncritical of its atrocities,
billions of dollars in US aid and a gullible US electorate
mislead by biased news coverage, Israel has been running
roughshod over its Palestinian population for years. Unless
this changes there will be no chance of peace, no chance for
Jews and Palestinians to live together. In short, there will
be no future. These nasty truths Stephen Pollard would like
us to ignore and that to even think such things is
anti-Semitic. But he is wrong and very shortsighted.

Lord Ahmed was correct to bring Israel
Shamir to the House of Lords. To not have done would have
been cowardly.

Thank you for reading my views.

Lynda Mortl

London NW6

From Paul Eisen to the Times:

Dear Sir or Madam

I was present at the Israel Shamir book
launch at the House of Lords and I applaud Lord Ahmed for giving
Shamir a place to speak and to be heard.

Is Shamir an anti-Semite? Well, it all
depends what you mean by the term. If you mean hating all Jews
simply because they are Jews, then that is just plain insane.
But if you mean having serious criticisms of the way many Jews
sometimes behave, both individually and collectively, or even
considering the possibility of a mindset of "specialness" within
many Jews which, when empowered and unbalanced, can lead to
notions of supremacism, then that is another matter altogether.

Dear Friend, Anti-Semite, Internal Enemy
Number 1 and Enemy of the State,

Congratulations, m'lord! You have certainly risen in the world,
addressing
the House of Lords no less. And imagine that I, a humble son
of a factory
worker knew you way back when. Where to next? The College of
Cardinals to
advise on selecting the new Pope?